linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] leds: core: Introduce generic pattern interface

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180714222924.GA2776@amd>
Date:   Sun, 15 Jul 2018 00:29:25 +0200
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:     Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>
Cc:     Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Linux LED Subsystem <linux-leds@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] leds: core: Introduce generic pattern interface

On Sun 2018-07-15 00:02:57, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
> Hi Pavel,
> 
> On 07/14/2018 11:20 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >Hi!
> >
> >>>It also drew my attention to the issue of desired pattern sysfs
> >>>interface semantics on uninitialized pattern. In your implementation
> >>>user seems to be unable to determine if the pattern is activated
> >>>or not. We should define the semantics for this use case and
> >>>describe it in the documentation. Possibly pattern could
> >>>return alone new line character then.
> >
> >Let me take a step back: we have triggers.. like LED blinking.
> >
> >How is that going to interact with patterns? We probably want the
> >patterns to be ignored in that case...?
> >
> >Which suggest to me that we should treat patterns as a trigger. I
> >believe we do something similar with blinking already.
> >
> >Then it is easy to determine if pattern is active, and pattern
> >vs. trigger issue is solved automatically.
> 
> I'm all for it. I proposed this approach during the previous
> discussions related to possible pattern interface implementations,
> but you seemed not to be so enthusiastic in [0].
> 
> [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/4/7/350

Hmm. Reading my own email now, I can't decipher it.

I believe I meant "changing patterns from kernel in response to events
is probably overkill"... or something like that.

Sorry about confusion,
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)